Profs argue confidential 2007 Magnotta interview should not be released to Crown

04/03/2013 02:51 EDT
|
Updated
06/03/2013 05:12 EDT

CP

ADVERTISEMENT

MONTREAL - Researchers from the University of Ottawa are trying to prevent the Crown from getting their hands on a six-year-old interview with Luka Rocco Magnotta.

Lawyers representing the academics argued in Quebec Superior Court on Wednesday the interview with a subject known under the pseudonym "Jimmy" should be kept confidential.

The lawyers say Magnotta participated in the study as part of a survey of sex workers under the condition his interview would remain confidential. Magnotta's lawyers, who have supported the researchers' motion, filed an affidavit confirming that later Wednesday.

Montreal police want a copy of the interview for evidence they're still gathering against Magnotta.

The 30-year-old is charged with first-degree murder in the slaying and dismemberment of Chinese engineering student Jun Lin.

Police came to know about the interview after a research assistant, Adam McLeod, told them about it following Magnotta's arrest last year. McLeod told authorities "Jimmy" was in fact Magnotta.

Peter Jacobsen, a lawyer representing the criminologists Dr. Colette Parent and Dr. Christine Bruckert, said he's not sure McLeod even realized he was breaking confidentiality when he called police. He suggested McLeod may have just been caught up in the media hype surrounding the case.

The fact he didn't think of it is problematic, Jacobsen said. Confidentiality is paramount in academia when dealing with sensitive topics.

"The promise of confidentiality must be upheld otherwise this type of research into the work of vulnerable and stigmatized groups like sex workers would not be possible," he said.

"They didn't even want his own handwriting on the document for fear it could be used to identify him," Jacobsen added.

"There was a serious and strong effort made to keep the material confidential."

Jacobsen doesn't believe the interview would even be relevant to the criminal case.

He said a forensic psychiatrist examined the study interview and found it would be of little use in a not-criminally responsible defence.

Crown prosecutor Alexandre Boucher conceded there might not be much to the material, but he urged Justice Sophie Bourque to look at the March 2007 interview before deciding on the petitioners' request.

The petitioners want to have the warrant quashed and the 68-page transcript and audio interview returned.

Boucher said the document should at least be looked at, since McLeod thought it was important enough for him to contact police.